{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,29]],"date-time":"2026-04-29T03:46:35Z","timestamp":1777434395563,"version":"3.51.4"},"reference-count":40,"publisher":"SAGE Publications","issue":"2-3","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2016,10,28]],"date-time":"2016-10-28T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1477612800000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["journals.sagepub.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Argument &amp; Computation"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2016,11,28]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>In multi-agent systems (MAS), abstract argumentation and argumentation schemes are increasingly important. To be useful for MAS, argumentation schemes require a computational approach so that agents can use the components of a scheme to construct and present arguments and counterarguments. This paper proposes a syntactic analysis that integrates argumentation schemes with abstract argumentation. Schemes can be analysed into the roles that propositions play in each scheme and the structure of the associated propositions, yielding a greater understanding of the schemes, a uniform method of analysis, and a systematic means to relate one scheme to another. This analysis of the schemes helps to clarify what is needed to provide denotations of the terms and predicates in a semantic model.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.3233\/aac-160010","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2016,11,29]],"date-time":"2016-11-29T11:26:18Z","timestamp":1480418778000},"page":"113-133","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/sage-journals-update-policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":4,"title":["A functional perspective on argumentation schemes"],"prefix":"10.1177","volume":"7","author":[{"given":"Adam","family":"Wyner","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Computing Science, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK. E-mail:\u00a0"}]}],"member":"179","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2016,10,28]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref001","unstructured":"L.\u00a0Amgoud and C.\u00a0Cayrol, On the acceptability of arguments in preference-based argumentation, in: Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI-98), Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, 1998, pp.\u00a01\u20137."},{"key":"ref002","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"L.\u00a0Amgoud, C.\u00a0Devred and M.\u00a0Lagasquie-Schiex, A constrained argumentation system for practical reasoning, in: Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, Fifth International Workshop, ArgMAS 2008, Revised Selected and Invited Papers, Vol.\u00a012, Estoril, Portugal, 2008, pp.\u00a037\u201356.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-00207-6_3"},{"key":"ref003","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"N.\u00a0Asher, Reference to Abstract Objects in Discourse, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-94-011-1715-9"},{"key":"ref004","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"K.\u00a0Atkinson, T.\u00a0Bench-Capon, D.\u00a0Cartwright and A.\u00a0Wyner, Semantic models for policy deliberation, in: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 2011), Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2011, pp.\u00a081\u201390.","DOI":"10.1145\/2018358.2018369"},{"key":"ref005","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2007.04.009"},{"key":"ref006","unstructured":"T.\u00a0Bench-Capon and K.\u00a0Atkinson, Argumentation schemes: From informal logic to computational models, in: Dialogue and Argumentation: An Examination of Douglas Walton\u015b Theories of Reasoning and Argument, C.\u00a0Reed and C.\u00a0Tindale, eds, Academic Press, London, 2010, pp.\u00a0103\u2013114."},{"key":"ref007","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10506-010-9094-8"},{"key":"ref008","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/logcom\/13.3.429"},{"key":"ref009","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"P.\u00a0Besnard and A.\u00a0Hunter, Elements of Argumentation, MIT Press, 2008.","DOI":"10.7551\/mitpress\/9780262026437.001.0001"},{"key":"ref010","unstructured":"F.\u00a0Bex, H.\u00a0Prakken and C.\u00a0Reed, A formal analysis of the AIF in terms of the ASPIC framework, in: Proceedings of the 2010 Conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010, IOS Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2010, pp.\u00a099\u2013110."},{"key":"ref011","unstructured":"G.\u00a0Chierchia and S.\u00a0McConnell-Ginet, Meaning and Grammar: An Introduction to Semantics, MIT Press, 2000."},{"key":"ref012","unstructured":"M.J.\u00a0Cresswell, Structured Meanings: The Semantics of Propositional Attitudes, Bradford Books. MIT Press, 1985."},{"key":"ref013","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"L.T.F.\u00a0Gamut, Logic, Language, and Meaning: Intensional Logic and Logical Grammar, University of Chicago Press, 1991.","DOI":"10.7208\/chicago\/9780226791708.001.0001"},{"key":"ref014","unstructured":"T.\u00a0Gordon, The Carneades web service, in: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Computational Models of Argument (COMMA 2012), B.\u00a0Verheij, S.\u00a0Szeider and S.\u00a0Woltran, eds, IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2012, pp.\u00a0517\u2013518."},{"key":"ref015","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.artint.2007.04.010"},{"key":"ref016","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1468-0394.1985.tb00449.x"},{"key":"ref017","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1145\/2850417"},{"key":"ref018","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/BF00872529"},{"key":"ref019","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(80)90011-9"},{"key":"ref020","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(86)90032-9"},{"key":"ref021","unstructured":"R.\u00a0Montague, The proper treatment of quantification in ordinary English, in: Formal Philosophy: Selected Papers of Richard Montague, R.\u00a0Thomason, ed. Yale University Press, 1974, pp.\u00a0247\u2013270."},{"key":"ref022","unstructured":"C.\u00a0Perelman and L.\u00a0Olbrechts-Tyteca, The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, University of Notre Dame, 1958. Translated into English by John Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver in 1969."},{"key":"ref023","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(94)00041-X"},{"key":"ref024","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Phan, M.\u00a0Dung, R.\u00a0Kowalski and F.\u00a0Toni, Assumption-based argumentation, in: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, Springer, 2009, pp.\u00a0199\u2013218.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-0-387-98197-0_10"},{"key":"ref025","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/19462160903564592"},{"key":"ref026","unstructured":"H.\u00a0Prakken, On the nature of argument schemes, in: Dialectics, Dialogue and Argumentation. An Examination of Douglas Walton\u2019s Theories of Reasoning and Argument, C.\u00a0Reed and C.\u00a0Tindale, eds, College Publications, London, 2010, pp.\u00a0167\u2013185."},{"key":"ref027","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"I.\u00a0Rahwan and L.\u00a0Amgoud, An argumentation based approach for practical reasoning, in: AAMAS, 2006, pp.\u00a0347\u2013354. doi:10.1145\/1160633.1160696.","DOI":"10.1145\/1160633.1160696"},{"key":"ref028","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1017\/S0269888911000191"},{"key":"ref029","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"I.\u00a0Rahwan and C.\u00a0Reed, The argument interchange format, in: Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, G.\u00a0Simari and I.\u00a0Rahwan, eds, Springer, US, 2009, pp.\u00a0383\u2013402. doi:10.1007\/978-0-387-98197-0_19.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-0-387-98197-0_19"},{"key":"ref030","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10458-005-1729-x"},{"key":"ref031","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0004-3702(87)90062-2"},{"key":"ref032","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"G.\u00a0Rowe and C.\u00a0Reed, Argument diagramming: The Araucaria Project, in: Knowledge Cartography: Software Tools and Mapping Techniques, A.\u00a0Okada, S.B.\u00a0Shum and T.\u00a0Sherborne, eds, Springer, 2008, pp.\u00a0163\u2013181.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-1-84800-149-7_8"},{"key":"ref033","unstructured":"Y.\u00a0Tang and S.\u00a0Parsons, Argumentation-based multi-agent dialogues for deliberation, in: Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, Second International Workshop, ArgMAS 2005, S.\u00a0Parsons, N.\u00a0Maudet, P.\u00a0Moraitis and I.\u00a0Rahwan, eds, Utrecht, The Netherlands, July 26, 2005, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol.\u00a04049, Springer, 2005, pp.\u00a0229\u2013244. Revised Selected and Invited Papers."},{"key":"ref034","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1023\/B:ARTI.0000046008.49443.36"},{"key":"ref035","unstructured":"D.\u00a0Walton, Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning, Erlbaum, Mahwah, N.J., 1996."},{"key":"ref036","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1017\/CBO9780511802034"},{"key":"ref037","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"A.\u00a0Wyner, K.\u00a0Angelov, G.\u00a0Barzdins, D.\u00a0Damljanovic, B.\u00a0Davis, N.\u00a0Fuchs, S.\u00a0Hoefler, K.\u00a0Jones, K.\u00a0Kaljurand, T.\u00a0Kuhn, M.\u00a0Luts, J.\u00a0Pool, M.\u00a0Rosner, R.\u00a0Schwitter and J.\u00a0Sowa, On controlled natural languages: Properties and prospects, in: Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Controlled Natural Language, CNL\u201909, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010, pp.\u00a0281\u2013289.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-14418-9_17"},{"key":"ref038","unstructured":"A.\u00a0Wyner and T.\u00a0Bench-Capon, Argument schemes for legal case-based reasoning, in: Legal Knowledge and Information Systems. JURIX 2007, A.R.\u00a0Lodder and L.\u00a0Mommers, eds, IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2007, pp.\u00a0139\u2013149."},{"key":"ref039","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"A.\u00a0Wyner, T.\u00a0Bench-Capon and K.\u00a0Atkinson, Towards formalising argumentation about legal cases, in: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 2011), Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2011, pp.\u00a01\u201310.","DOI":"10.1145\/2018358.2018359"},{"key":"ref040","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"A.Z.\u00a0Wyner, K.\u00a0Atkinson and T.\u00a0Bench-Capon, Towards a structured online consultation tool, in: Electronic Participation\u00a0\u2013 Third International Conference (ePart 2011), Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), Vol.\u00a06847, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2011, pp.\u00a0286\u2013297.","DOI":"10.1007\/978-3-642-23333-3_25"}],"container-title":["Argument &amp; Computation"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.3233\/AAC-160010","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.3233\/AAC-160010","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.3233\/AAC-160010","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,28]],"date-time":"2026-04-28T11:53:47Z","timestamp":1777377227000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.sagepub.com\/doi\/10.3233\/AAC-160010"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2016,10,28]]},"references-count":40,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2-3","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2016,11,28]]}},"alternative-id":["10.3233\/AAC-160010"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3233\/aac-160010","relation":{},"ISSN":["1946-2166","1946-2174"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1946-2166","type":"print"},{"value":"1946-2174","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2016,10,28]]}}}